Re: Proposed charter change for the 'Why EPUB 4' issue

Fine for me too

Cristina

 

 

Da: Paul Belfanti <Paul.Belfanti@ascendlearning.com>
Data: lunedì 20 marzo 2017 16:58
A: Rick <Rick.Johnson@ingramcontent.com>, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>
Cc: Bill Kasdorf <bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com>, Luc AUDRAIN <LAUDRAIN@hachette-livre.fr>, "McCloy-Kelley, Liisa" <lmccloy-kelley@penguinrandomhouse.com>, Graham BELL <graham@editeur.org>, W3C Publishing Business Group <public-publishingbg@w3.org>, W3C Digital Publishing IG <public-digipub-ig@w3.org>, W3C Publishing Steering Committee <public-publishing-sc@w3.org>
Oggetto: Re: Proposed charter change for the 'Why EPUB 4' issue
Rinviato da: <public-publishingbg@w3.org>
Data rinvio: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 15:58:59 +0000

 

+1

 

Paul 

—

Paul Belfanti

VP, Production, Manufacturing & Content Architecture

(w) 978.639.3536

(m) 201.783.4884

 

From: Rick Johnson <Rick.Johnson@ingramcontent.com>
Date: Monday, March 20, 2017 at 11:55 AM
To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>
Cc: Bill Kasdorf <bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com>, Luc Audrain <LAUDRAIN@hachette-livre.fr>, "McCloy-Kelley, Liisa" <lmccloy-kelley@penguinrandomhouse.com>, Graham Bell <graham@editeur.org>, W3C Publishing Business Group <public-publishingbg@w3.org>, W3C Digital Publishing IG <public-digipub-ig@w3.org>, W3C Publishing Steering Committee <public-publishing-sc@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Proposed charter change for the 'Why EPUB 4' issue
Resent-From: <public-publishing-sc@w3.org>
Resent-Date: Monday, March 20, 2017 at 11:55 AM

 

+1

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2017 3:50:26 PM
To: Leonard Rosenthol
Cc: Bill Kasdorf; Luc Audrain; McCloy-Kelley, Liisa; Graham Bell; W3C Publishing Business Group; W3C Digital Publishing IG; W3C Publishing Steering Committee
Subject: Re: Proposed charter change for the 'Why EPUB 4' issue 

 

O.k. guys, here is the next version:

 

 

[[[

<a href="https://www.w3.org/Submission/2017/SUBM-epub31-20170125/">EPUB</a> has become one of the fundamental technologies for the global publishing ecosystem (see the <a href="https://w3c.github.io/dpubwg-charter/EPUB4_business_case.html">separate document</a>, published by the <a href="https://www.w3.org/community/publishingbg/">W3C Publishing Business Group</a>, for more details and backgrounds). It is the preferred format for a broad range of types of publications, not only for distribution but increasingly also for authoring and production workflows.  As part of the work on Web Publications, described in this charter, it is also critical that a next generation of EPUB, currently referred to as EPUB&nbsp;4, retain the specificity, portability, predictability, internationalization, and accessibility required by the publishing ecosystem while benefitting from the improved features and functionalities offered by Packaged Web Publications. EPUB&nbsp;4 must not be in conflict with Web Publications; it must be a type of Web Publication that provides the predictability and interoperability that this ecosystem has come to rely on.

]]

 

 

Is it a go for everyone?

 

We should still decide whether the separate document should move into a different repository, but that can be done later.

 

Ivan

 

 

 

 

On 20 Mar 2017, at 16:45, Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com> wrote:

 

Can we cut it down just a bit?

 

Either:

"...has become one of the most important technologies for the global ecosystem"

 

or 

"...has become one of the fundamental technologies for the global ecosystem"

 

but we don’t need both “most important” and “fundamental”…

 

And then yes, I am good with that.   Thanks!

 

Leonard

 

 

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Monday, March 20, 2017 at 9:13 PM
To: Bill Kasdorf <bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com>
Cc: Luc Audrain <LAUDRAIN@hachette-livre.fr>, Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>, "McCloy-Kelley, Liisa" <lmccloy-kelley@penguinrandomhouse.com>, Graham Bell <graham@editeur.org>, W3C Publishing Business Group <public-publishingbg@w3.org>, W3C Digital Publishing IG <public-digipub-ig@w3.org>, W3C Publishing Steering Committee <public-publishing-sc@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Proposed charter change for the 'Why EPUB 4' issue

 

Leonard, are you happy with my amendment ? 

 

"...has become one of the most important fundamental technologies for the global ecosystem"

 

Ivan

 

 

 

On 20 Mar 2017, at 15:13, Bill Kasdorf <bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com> wrote:

 

I am fine with where this got since yesterday, namely Ivan’s latest proposal.

 

Luc, with regard to the authoring and production workflows issue, what I wanted to convey there is that EPUB _is_ increasingly being used in authoring and production workflows. Today that is happening mainly in educational publishing—publishers like Pearson, HMH, and Macmillan Learning are “building it in” to their workflows way upstream, and authoring systems like VitalSource Content Studio and Inkling’s Habitat are built from the ground up to produce EPUBs. Certainly Word and InDesign are dominant in trade publishing; but even there, increasingly EPUBs are created as part of the editorial and production workflow rather than as post-processing from PDFs.

 

Bill Kasdorf
VP and Principal Consultant | Apex CoVantage
p:
734-904-6252  m:   734-904-6252
ISNI: http://isni.org/isni/0000000116490786

ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7002-4786

 

 

From: AUDRAIN LUC [mailto:LAUDRAIN@hachette-livre.fr] 
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2017 8:56 AM
To: Ivan Herman; Leonard Rosenthol
Cc: McCloy-Kelley, Liisa; Graham Bell; W3C Publishing Business Group; Bill Kasdorf; W3C Digital Publishing IG; W3C Publishing Steering Committee
Subject: Re: Proposed charter change for the 'Why EPUB 4' issue

 

Yes I agree that we should not be so absolute as I may express some reserves on the wording « not only for distribution but also for authoring and production workflows. »

 

If here « authoring and production » means upstream work on content creation by authors and publishers editing teams, I have to admit that it is still wishful thinking.

Authoring by authors is mainly done in Word, and page production is done either with XML based composition systems or with InDesign page layout tool.

 

Luc

 

De : Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date : lundi 20 mars 2017 13:49
À : Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>
Cc : "McCloy-Kelley, Liisa" <lmccloy-kelley@penguinrandomhouse.com>, AUDRAIN LUC AUDRAIN LUC <laudrain@hachette-livre.fr>, Graham Bell <graham@editeur.org>, W3C Publishing Business Group <public-publishingbg@w3.org>, Bill Kasdorf <bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com>, W3C Digital Publishing IG <public-digipub-ig@w3.org>, W3C Publishing Steering Committee <public-publishing-sc@w3.org>
Objet : Re: Proposed charter change for the 'Why EPUB 4' issue

 

Trying to get out of this deadlock and eager to move on; what about:

 

"...has become one of the most important fundamental technologies for the global ecosystem"

 

a bit of a mouthful but seems to be between the two extremes of 'a' vs. 'the'

 

WDYT?

 

Ivan 

 

 

On 20 Mar 2017, at 12:49, Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com> wrote:

 

Liisa – I completely agree with you and certainly wouldn’t suggest that anyone wait for PWP or EPUB4…

 

But to say that EPUB is THE fundamental technology for the global publish ecosystem is simply false.  I think you would agree that the web itself, printing presses, or any number of larger scale systems are more fundamental to that ecosystem than EPUB.

 

So making that one small change (of ‘the fundamental’ to ‘a fundemantal”) will make the paragraph truthful and realistic.

 

Leonard

 

From: "McCloy-Kelley, Liisa" <lmccloy-kelley@penguinrandomhouse.com>
Date: Monday, March 20, 2017 at 4:17 PM
To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, Luc Audrain <LAUDRAIN@hachette-livre.fr>
Cc: Graham Bell <graham@editeur.org>, Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>, W3C Publishing Business Group <public-publishingbg@w3.org>, Bill Kasdorf <bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com>, W3C Digital Publishing IG <public-digipub-ig@w3.org>, W3C Publishing Steering Committee <public-publishing-sc@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Proposed charter change for the 'Why EPUB 4' issue

 

Ivan-  I’m quite happy with what you have below and think Graham’s changes have enhanced the original text. 

 

Leonard- I understand your point, but it is important for those of us coming from the EPUB community to help people understand that it will continue to be a strong format in this new world and that no one using it now loses faith in continuing to use it for the near future. I met someone at the EPUB Summit in Brussels who said “Oh- this PWP- I will wait for it. It sounds fantastic.”  Yes, sure, it will be fantastic. We’ll all make it fantastic and flexible. But no one should hold off on digitization waiting for PWP.  I hope you can understand. 

 

 

 

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Monday, March 20, 2017 at 3:16 AM
To: Luc Audrain <LAUDRAIN@hachette-livre.fr>
Cc: Graham Bell <graham@editeur.org>, Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>, W3C Publishing Business Group <public-publishingbg@w3.org>, Bill Kasdorf <bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com>, Microsoft Office User <lmccloy-kelley@penguinrandomhouse.com>, W3C Digital Publishing IG <public-digipub-ig@w3.org>, W3C Publishing Steering Committee <public-publishing-sc@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Proposed charter change for the 'Why EPUB 4' issue

 

Just to be absolutely sure, and avoid further misunderstandings, is this a text we can agreed upon? I adopted Graham's changes on the original text and,  actually, I allowed myself to add one more adjective, in line with the earlier comments (in another issue) of Richard Ishida, our Internationalization guy on the team, namely accessibility (this is something he asked to add on other places as well). I have put in bold the two important parts of the text in this discussion:

 

[[[

<a href="https://www.w3.org/Submission/2017/SUBM-epub31-20170125/">EPUB</a> has become the fundamental technology for the global publishing ecosystem (see the <a href="https://w3c.github.io/dpubwg-charter/EPUB4_business_case.html">separate document</a>, published by the <a href="https://www.w3.org/community/publishingbg/">W3C Publishing Business Group</a>, for more details and backgrounds). It is the preferred format for a broad range of types of publications, not only for distribution but also for authoring and production workflows.  As part of the work on Web Publications, described in this charter, it is also critical that a next generation of EPUB, currently referred to as EPUB 4, retain the specificity, portability, predictability, internationalization, and accessibility required by the publishing ecosystem while benefitting from the improved features and functionalities offered by Packaged Web Publications. EPUB 4 must not be in conflict with Web Publications; it must be a type of Web Publication that provides the predictability and interoperability that this ecosystem has come to rely on.

]]

 

Ivan

 

 

On 20 Mar 2017, at 07:41, AUDRAIN LUC <LAUDRAIN@hachette-livre.fr> wrote:

 

Hi,

 

I prefer original language and support Graham proposition about « particular mention of accessibility ».

 

Luc

 

De : Graham Bell <graham@editeur.org>
Date : dimanche 19 mars 2017 22:59
À : Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>
Cc : Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, W3C Publishing Business Group <public-publishingbg@w3.org>, Bill Kasdorf <bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com>, Liisa McCloy-Kelley <lmccloy-kelley@penguinrandomhouse.com>, W3C Digital Publishing IG <public-digipub-ig@w3.org>, W3C Publishing Steering Committee <public-publishing-sc@w3.org>
Objet : Re: Proposed charter change for the 'Why EPUB 4' issue
Renvoyer - De : <public-digipub-ig@w3.org>
Renvoyer - Date : dimanche 19 mars 2017 23:00

 

All

 

I'm don't agree with these proposed changes. They have the effect of making it sound a little like accessibility is the only reason to choose EPUB.

 

It is THE preferred format for a broad range of types of doc (while not necessarily being preferred for some other types of doc). And this is true irrespective of their level of accessibility -- accessibility is one of several reasons to prefer EPUB, and some are even listed in the next sentence.

 

Now I do agree there should be particular mention of accessibility. So instead of moving accessible earlier in the sentence, I would suggest it's added to "specificity, portability, predictability and accessibility" instead.






 It is the preferred format for a broad range of types of accessible publications, not only for distribution but also for authoring and production workflows, and for accessibility. As part of the work on Web Publications, described in this charter, it is also critical that a next generation of EPUB, currently referred to as EPUB 4, retain the specificity, portability, and predictability required by the publishing ecosystem while benefitting from the improved features and functionalities offered by Packaged Web Publications. EPUB 4 must not be in conflict with Web Publications; it must be a type of Web Publication that provides the predictability and interoperability that this ecosystem has come to rely on.


Graham Bell 

EDItEUR

 

Sent from my iPhone


On 19 Mar 2017, at 08:45, Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com> wrote:

Proposed changes to the EPUB 4 text in the charter:  (changes inline in red, and called out individually following)

 

<a href="https://www.w3.org/Submission/2017/SUBM-epub31-20170125/">EPUB</a> has become a fundamental technology for the global publishing ecosystem (see the <a href="https://w3c.github.io/dpubwg-charter/EPUB4_business_case.html">separate document</a>, published by the <a href="https://www.w3.org/community/publishingbg/">W3C Publishing Business Group</a>, for more details and backgrounds). It is a preferred format for a broad range of types of accessible publications, not only for distribution but also for authoring and production workflows, and for accessibility. As part of the work on Web Publications, described in this charter, it is also critical that a next generation of EPUB, currently referred to as EPUB 4, retain the specificity, portability, and predictability required by the publishing ecosystem while benefitting from the improved features and functionalities offered by Packaged Web Publications. EPUB 4 must not be in conflict with Web Publications; it must be a type of Web Publication that provides the predictability and interoperability that this ecosystem has come to rely on.

 

1 – the -> a (since there are many preferred formats used in publishing depending on the context)

2 – moved accessibility to be more primary in the description of publications (and make the sentence clearer)

 

 

Leonard

 

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Saturday, March 18, 2017 at 3:50 PM
To: W3C Publishing Business Group <public-publishingbg@w3.org>
Cc: Bill Kasdorf <bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com>, Liisa McCloy-Kelley <lmccloy-kelley@penguinrandomhouse.com>, W3C Digital Publishing IG <public-digipub-ig@w3.org>, W3C Publishing Steering Committee <public-publishing-sc@w3.org>
Subject: Proposed charter change for the 'Why EPUB 4' issue
Resent-From: <public-publishingbg@w3.org>
Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 15:50:33 +0000

 

Dear all,

 

as agreed on the F2F meeting in London, there is now a proposal to settle Issue #27[1]. BillK (with minor help from Liisa and I) has created a document on the business case of EPUB & EPUB 4[2], and a there is also a proposal for the charter text that contains a single paragraph and a reference to that document[3] (see the paragraph right before section 2.1).

 

These changes have not yet been incorporated into the 'main' charter (hence the funny URL-s [2] and [3]). Please either add your  comment to [1] or the "Pull request" issue[4]. If you want to propose specific editorial changes, that can also be done by using [5] or [6], respectively.

 

Thanks

 

Ivan

 

P.S. The link to the 'business case' in the proposed new charter paragraph does not work at this moment; it points to the place where the final document will be if and when this proposed change, a.k.a. 'pull request' is merged to the main branch. 

 

 

[1] https://github.com/w3c/dpubwg-charter/issues/27

[2] https://rawgit.com/w3c/dpubwg-charter/bcase-draft/EPUB4_business_case.html

[3] https://rawgit.com/w3c/dpubwg-charter/bcase-draft/index.html

[4] https://github.com/w3c/dpubwg-charter/pull/41

[5] https://github.com/w3c/dpubwg-charter/blob/bcase-draft/EPUB4_business_case.html

[6] https://github.com/w3c/dpubwg-charter/blob/bcase-draft/index.html

 

----
Ivan Herman, W3C 
Publishing@W3C Technical Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153

ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704

 


----
Ivan Herman, W3C 
Publishing@W3C Technical Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153

ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704






 

 


----
Ivan Herman, W3C 
Publishing@W3C Technical Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153

ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704

 


----
Ivan Herman, W3C 
Publishing@W3C Technical Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153

ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704




 

 


----
Ivan Herman, W3C 
Publishing@W3C Technical Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153

ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704




 



CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message including attachments, if any, is intended for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential, privileged, and/or proprietary material. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited.  If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.